I think they have picked niche that's to small. If you really need to pull something that big, just move up to a MDT (small semi tractor). If you don't need the ultimate tow capabilities but really want the extra range, get an in bed tank to supplement.
So they are going after the market that...Needs a really big truck but doesn't want to drive around in a really big truck...sort of not really.
I have a 300 mile range towing now and have to stop at least once (usually twice) before needing a fill up.
Tammy Mike & the Bilge Rat (AKA: Diego)
Ford F250 7.3L
1997 Sunnybrook 27' 5er
1995 Gemini Sail Catamaran 34'
Full Time spliting time between boat and 5er
Regardless of the fuel capacity I would not think they would be trying to sell to any kind of long haul market.
Who would want to pound up and down the road day after day in something like this truck. The seats are no good, there is no sleeper, turning radius is very poor, poor braking system, visibility is poor, it would be a form of torture for the driver, you would have to look hard to hire someone who would put up with this truck day after day.
I like it. Is it for everyone? No. That is a great use of the gap between the bed and the cab. If there was a way to put a nice big cabover on there that would be a fantastic hauler. But, It might look a little funny with that big gap between the bed and the cab.
Take out the high cap fuel system, shorten it up a bit and that would be the perfect heavy duty camper hauler.
woodhog wrote: Regardless of the fuel capacity I would not think they would be trying to sell to any kind of long haul market.
Who would want to pound up and down the road day after day in something like this truck. The seats are no good, there is no sleeper, turning radius is very poor, poor braking system, visibility is poor, it would be a form of torture for the driver, you would have to look hard to hire someone who would put up with this truck day after day.
There are already thousands of guys running loads with similar trucks, they're called hotshots. They're usually owner-operators.
This truck would compete with buying a 1t dually and adding the extra tanks for that market. It is a small market though.
I would like to know how anyone here really KNOWS that the turning radius is not good. If the truck is still being evaluated, how does anyone REALLY know anything about this truck other than what they THINK about it. I'd love to see one and drive it just to see how it handles. Until I can do that, I know NOTHING about that.
Frank
2011 Palomino Maverick 1000SLLB on a 2004 Dodge Quadcab CTD Ram3500 SRW long bed equipped with Timbren springs, Stable Load bump stops, Rickson 19.5" wheels/"G" range tires and a Helwig "Big Wig" rear anti sway bar.
sirdrakejr wrote: I would like to know how anyone here really KNOWS that the turning radius is not good. If the truck is still being evaluated, how does anyone REALLY know anything about this truck other than what they THINK about it. I'd love to see one and drive it just to see how it handles. Until I can do that, I know NOTHING about that.
Frank
I believe they are going off the turn radius of standard long bed extended cab trucks which are horrendus to do a u-turn. Assuming the same steering system is used, the extra length only makes it worse.
If they already addressed this, they should have highlighted it along with the GVWR and range stats. Otherwise, its a fair assumption you will need a couple of acres to turn it around.
It's obviously targeted to the Hotshot and Monster-5ver market, you aren't doing u-turns with either of those. It has an in-bed tank so it wouldn't work for a camper anyways.
Quote:
It’s just a concept right now, but Ram‘s Heavy-Duty based Long Hauler, is already making waves. Based on a Class 5 Heavy Duty Chassis Cab, it features an 8-foot long dually pickup box and extra fuel provisions – a 60 gallon resevoir mounted between the cab and the bed, plus a further bed mounted fuel tank that holds 50 gallons.
Making assumptions about its turning radius, comfort and visibility etc, etc. with out actually seeing and driving = to removing all doubt......
I seem to remember reading some where that the Dodge 450 and 550 C & C had a tighter turning radius then the regular duty trucks. So I would think that this truck Probably has a tighter steering system on it. Need to investigate, (What am I thinking, I cant afford this thing, lol)
SoCalDesertRider wrote: I see it as targeted as an RV puller, not a commercial truck. As a commercial truck, it's high weight carrying ability is wasted on the useless pickup bed. It needs a flat bed, box body, dump bed, stake bed, service bed, crane body, rollback bed, wrecker body, etc on it to be useful to commercial vocations. No commercial fleet buyer in his right mind is going to spend $80K on a truck with an 8' pickup bed to work from. That kind of investment needs to be tailored to the specific application and a sheetmetal pickup bed is about the least useful kind of work body invented.
Agree. As a TC base it would be good for a huge TC, that was not going off road. It has been primarily designed for the large 5ver and horse trailer community.
My '08 4500 turns a lot tighter than my '96 2500, even though the 4500 wheelbase length is longer. The front tires on Ram cab and chassis trucks have a wider stance than a 3500/2500 so there's more room to swing the tires towards the frame.
I'm guessing Dodge is competing against the Ford F450 (Non cab and chassis) pickup which comes with a bed.
Brian
Lance 10'9" Squire '96 2500 4x2 Cummins CC camper option, DD2's, 191 delivery valves, 15.5*, #4 Plate, 3K GSK, AFC spring, PDR B-1-2-EX3, PacBrake, ATS Stage IV, RS9000, AirLift airbags,
Offline
